D&D 5E Every Fight a Nova: Consequences and Considerations

[Mort]

If you're playing both the long rest and short rest classes as "expected" and have an encounter schedule as given in the DMG it won't show up. Because the long rest classes are conserving their resources according to the daily resource refresh schedule and the short rest classes are conserving their resources according to the short rest refresh schedule - meaning that if you know your GM is going to give you 2-3 encounters before you get a short rest, that's how you're going to use your short rest abilities and so you'll be spending your resources on the same budget as the long rest classes.

If you have a short rest after every encounter you'd see the imbalance start to show up in that direction - the short rest classes can blow through their resources then rest up and be at close to full strength for the next encounter every time, so they can basically nova every encounter without trying. However their nova potential is much smaller than the long rest classes because they're built to spend all of their resources over 2-3 encounters and then refresh. So it won't be as obvious or as extreme as the long rest class in a single battle (and honestly I tend to give 3-4 double strength encounters per long rest and a short rest every 1 or 2 combat encounters and mostly even at high levels I think it's only noticeable to me because I'm looking for it).

Another place where you'd spot it is if you have many more encounters before a long rest. Like if you had 11-12 encounters before a long rest instead of 6-8. You'd see the short rest classes peforming at roughly the same power level through all of those encounters while the long rest classes would either have to tone down their spell slot usage per encounter a lot or would burn through their spells and be doing nothing but throwing cantrips for most of the encounters. But I doubt that anyone does this - 6-8 encounters already feels like it's at the high end of what can be considered an "adventuring day" - but if they do I bet their players gravitate towards short rest classes over long rest ones.

I'm very curious how tweaked the short rest classes will be in the 2024 books. It looks like almost all mechanics are moving toward a long rest reset.

 

[Jer]

I'm very curious how tweaked the short rest classes will be in the 2024 books. It looks like almost all mechanics are moving toward a long rest reset.

It's much easier to balance encounters around a single resting mechanism. It's easiest to balance encounters around everyone getting a short-rest refresh because you can have some expectations of how resources will be spent per encounter and those assumptions are fairly minimal and usually work. But once you've decided to put some classes onto a daily refresh schedule encounter design becomes harder because you have to start making assumptions about how many resources are being spent per encounter by those classes, and if you get that assumption wrong - or if that assumption is not uniform across tables - then you get something that ends up being a lot like 5e's current encounter design. Very swingy and easy to make encounters too easy or too hard regardless of the guidelines or how you play the monsters. So putting everyone either onto a short rest refresh or a long rest refresh would make things easier for new DMs building encounters - and new DMs seems to be a thing they're very much concerned with lately too.

And since putting everyone onto a short rest refresh has been deemed a no go, moving everyone to a long rest refresh is where I'd expect them to take it.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I don't think just asserting that it's a failure waiting to happen is very helpful. If the Deadly++ encounter is a non starter, then that's a considering in talking about how to manage the form, not a reason not to do it.

Indeed. I think that is where the advice about having different stages to the fight, or reinforcements arriving in waves is useful: it lets the DM adjust on the fly in case of bad luck. You can still design an encounter that isn't too easy for the party, but change it partway through if the party get unlucky and are in trouble.

This is sort of an aside, but if there is inherent class imbalance with single nova encounters then there must be inherent class imbalance with multiple medium encounters. No one seems to talk much about that issue (that I have seen).

The multiple medium encounters are closer to what 5e is balanced around, so there isn't so much class imbalance. Generally a 6-8 encounter day, with two short rests and a long rest seems to be the sweet spot for class balance, backed up by comments from the designers to that end I believe.
Have 9+ encounters in a day and the game will start to favour at-will heavy classes like most martials. Have less than 5 encounters, and/or only one short rest, and the game starts to favour full-caster classes.

That's interesting. I never looked to see how many "points" (to use a term that really doesn't apply) the different classes had between rests. Does anyone know if the internet has produced a chart somewhere actually showing this information?

You can use the spell point variant to compare some classes. For example monks (particularly the 4-elements) are set up as short-rest-based half-casters. (As in they have about 1/3rd as many ki points as a half-caster would have spell points and spend them at the same costs as a half-caster would for the same spell.) Multiply their Ki by three (since it would be expected to refresh three times a day rather than once for a normal spell caster) and those are the resources the class is expected to have access to between long rests.

Likewise there is a rough equivalency if you convert Warlock spellcasting into spell points compared to a normal full caster: they have about 1/3rd as many.

So my experiences, with the various classes and NOVA capability (there will be holes, since my group heavily gravitates toward certain classes):

Artificer - A hole for me right of the bat (have seen exactly 1 artificer played in 5e, no one took one even in my Eberron campaign): But it's a half-caster with a lot of magic item related powers. Does not SEEM to be a big NOVA class, more of a long haul class. But, I'll leave specifics to someone more familiar.

Cleric - Full caster again. The big thing with the cleric going full bore every encounter? Healing word means, even IF someone drops, they won't stay dropped -and since the cleric isn't conserving slots this will just keep happening. Since it's got an ok range, the cleric can even do this from the back line. AND can do it and still attack from range (with a cantrip, but still). All the while they will have spirit guardians etc. to make enemies regret closing. If you have a twilight or a peace cleric and your group is only expecting the one encounter? at mid+ levels, you will not be able to keep a party member down without ludicrous damage and/or effects.

Rogue - No NOVA at all really other than a bit for the arcane trickster (and a tiny bit on the soulknife). But rogues are pretty solid, so should be able to hang in there. Plus, hopefully serious out of combat utility. Depending on what surrounds the one NOVA encounter, this class may end up being avoided.

Warlock - A "kind of" on the full caster. But because we're expecting only 1 encounter, their small spell output isn't nearly as limiting as it could be. Plus all their lower level spells being at "max" level will help a lot. Could excel here, with the right build. And certainly wouldn't be too far behind otherwise.

Thoughts?

Artificer: - You're correct. Artificers are very much built around sustained damage and support, and very little nova. In a long adventuring day they will excel but they cannot compete with a full caster in nova capability.

Cleric: - Healing word prevents casting another full spell that round. At a certain level it is probably more efficient to just continue to cast high-level spells rather than healing word and cantrip to get someone back up. Particularly if that character isn't a full caster and so may not be able to contribute as much as the cleric continuing to nova.

Warlock: - Will perform much worse than a long-rest-based full caster if the encounter goes on longer than their spell slots. A full-caster can just start casting their next lowest level of spells, but the warlock will be down to cantrips. (Very effective cantrips: better than a lot of martial attacks, but generally no competition between those and reasonably high level spells.)

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't intend for this thread to discuss whether having every fight be a nova (i.e. PCs expend all of their most powerful abilities) is necessarily good or bad. Rather, I want to talk about what consequences and consideration should be taken into account ASSUMING that every fight is going to be a nova.

Should every challenge be set to deadly? Can we make adjustments to how numbers of enemies impact that difficulty? What does a nova set piece look like that is different than a "standard" set piece?

Other thoughts and considerations?

If I was going to have every fight be a nova then I would try to avoid deathmatch style combat. Alternate goals. Side goals. Etc. That's where I would start.

Next up is enemy forces. Mix up types of enemies as it's much more interesting. Add more enemies but try not to overdo numbers (AOE's can take out 20 just as easily as 4). Instead also consider placing stronger enemies into the battle or buffing the enemies in some way.

Terrain and Positioning. Spread enemies out more. Place intersting terrain features on the battlefield for vision blocking and tactical advantages (both sides).

Increase enemy intelligence. Smart enemies can challenge PCs alot more than dumb ones. You may not even need more enemies or stronger enemies if you just have the ones there play smart (possibly use traps/etc).

Even Short rest recharge classes get a nice bump. Throwing out 4 superiority dice an action surge and 2nd wind in a single combat is huge (especially with combat bonuses). A monk using flurry and stunning strike every turn is insane. The only one that really gets shafted in combat is the rogue. Even Warlocks being able to cast a strong concentration spell and follow that up with strong at-will attacks will feel good. Although full casters will likely still feel a little better - especially the arcane variety. Rogues are the one class that really gets shafted in combat, but they have a ton out of combat they can do and in a Nova encounter style session out of combat setup will likely be very important.

 

[tetrasodium]

Stopping there - you are quoting a message that said that there are classes that due to resource management only get a single nova battle a day. So there is no "repeat" that can be assumed in the concept that all battles are nova battles.

Yes it does, but that's not all it says, keep reading it. The post in question says

Spoiler

"Other classes, especially at-will classes or short-rest classes, explicitly can't bring as much in a single nova battle, but would be balanced over multiple battles per day.

Basically, the varying recovery models of the different classes in 5e are not compatible with the concept of every battle being a nova. Other RPGs, including D&D 4e (pre-essentials) where everyone has the same resources, could do it.
"

The nova problem extends in both directions rather than being limited to just single encounter days. It does that because classes are each designed around one of two different rest schedules

 

[Flamestrike]

This is sort of an aside, but if there is inherent class imbalance with single nova encounters then there must be inherent class imbalance with multiple medium encounters. No one seems to talk much about that issue (that I have seen).

There certainly can be.

Like; if your DM is granting frequent Short rests, on long multi encounter (7+ encounter) Adventuring days, then Fighters, Warlocks and Monks are going to dominate.

Your spell casters (and Paladins) are trying to marshal and conserve resources (slots mainly) over several encounters, while your 'locks, Fighters and Monks are basically getting everything back every 1-2 encounters.

I've done the math, comparing a BM Fighter (short rest heavy) to a Devotion Paladin (Long rest heavy) and find they balance out (DPR/ Healing/ untility etc) at roughly the 6 encounter/ 2 short rest per long rest median.

Ditto a Warlock compared to a Wizard.

If you add in more short rests, the Fighter and Warlock pull ahead. If you reduce the number of short rests, the Wizard and Paladin pull ahead.

 

[Flamestrike]

An even more important question might be "Why try and derail a discussion that otherwise has no impact on your personal gaming fun."

It's not derailing anything dude.

It's asking the question of 'what does it add to a game'.

I can list a ton of things it takes away. I'd like to know what would a game gain from being reduced to rocket tag?

 

[Flamestrike]

Paladin 7 vs BM Fighter 7

Presuming 2 short rests/ 6 encounters in an Adventuring day:

Damage:
Fighter: Pool of 15d8 (sup dice) with riders.
Paladin: Pool of 17d8 (smites), no riders, but can be exchanged for utility (with spells).

Healing:
Fighter: Self heal (bonus action) 37.5HP
Paladin: Heal anyone (action): 35 HP.

Other:
Fighter: Action surge (3 uses), Bonus feat
Paladin: Divine channel (3 uses), Cha to saves aura

As you can see, at that rest frequency they're about on par. You can repeat the same experiment at every single level, and the results are largely the same.

Add an extra Short rest, and the Fighter pulls ahead. Reduce the number of Short rests to 1 (or even zero) and the Paladin pulls ahead.

 

[Flamestrike]

To extrapolate the above further in a 'Nova' context.

Presuming both the Paladin and Fighter are fully rested. Both use Longswords. Main stats are +3.

On round 1:
The Nova Paladin gets +6d8 extra damage (2 x 2nd level smites)
The Nova Fighter gets +6d8+6 extra damage (Action surge and burning 4 Sup dice)

On round 2:
The Nova Paladin gets +5d8 extra damage (2nd and 1st level smite)
The Nova Fighter gets +1d8 extra damage (final sup dice)

On round 3:
The Nova Paladin gets +4d8 extra damage (2 x 1st level smites).
The Fighter gets nothing.

There are variables of course (the Paladin could pre-buff a lot easier with a Hunters Mark, Divine favor or Bless etc, and can use his Bonus action for Smite spells for an even greater Nova, while the Fighter could be packing a Bow - he's much better than the Paladin at range - and combo-ing sharpshooter and Precise/ menacing), but largely these tend to skew the Nova even more in favor of the Paladin, presuming melee range is attainable in round 1.

Interestingly if you tripled the Short rest resources of the Fighter (and made them come back on a Long rest instead, just like the Paladins slots/ smites) they again come out more or less even over the course of the whole 3 rounds.

 

[Reynard]

Interestingly if you tripled the Short rest resources of the Fighter (and made them come back on a Long rest instead, just like the Paladins slots/ smites) they again come out more or less even over the course of the whole 3 rounds.

I wonder if this is what is apparently driving "5.5" design away from short rest mechanics.